Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30377391›Full record

ReviewReproductive medicine and biology2018

Recent advances in oncofertility care worldwide and in Japan.

Yasushi Takai

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reproductive medicine and biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Oncofertility in Islam: The Malaysian Perspective.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2021
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Recent advances in oncofertility care worldwide and in Japan.Reproductive medicine and biology · 2018
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Yasushi TakaiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology Saitama Medical Center Saitama Medical University Kawagoe Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-3872-8481

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOncofertility is a crucial facet of cancer supportive care. The publication of guidelines for the cryopreservation of oocytes and ovarian tissue is becoming increasingly prevalent in Japan and an updated overview is necessary.

methodsIn order to provide an updated overview of oncofertility care, original research and review articles were searched from the PubMed database and compared in order to present clinical care in Japan.

resultsIn Western countries, various methods for ovarian stimulation, such as the combined use of aromatase inhibitors and random-start protocols, have been reported. Although ovarian tissue cryopreservation, mainly performed via the slow-freezing method, also has yielded >100 live births, the optimal indications and procedures for the auto-transplantation of cryopreserved tissue have been under investigation. In Japan, however, vitrification is prevalent for ovarian tissue cryopreservation, although its efficacy has not yet been established. The quality of network systems for providing oncofertility care in Japan varies greatly, based on the region.

conclusionThere remain many issues in the optimization of oncofertility care in Japan. Along with the regional oncofertility networks, the creation of "oncofertility navigators" from healthcare providers who are familiar with oncofertility, such as nurses, psychologists, and embryologists, could be useful for supplementing oncofertility care coordination, overcoming the issues in individual regions.

Indexed as

cryopreservationfertility preservationoocytesovarysurvivorship

Identifiers

PMID30377391
PMCPMC6194250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.